Research paper‘Just gripping my heart and squeezing’: Naming and explaining the emotional experience of receiving bad news in the paediatric oncology setting☆
Introduction
Breaking bad news is perceived by practitioners as one of the more challenging aspects of their work, even by those practitioners who find themselves in this situation on a relatively regular basis [1], [2]. Clinicians may exhibit physiological stress responses before and during the delivery of bad news and experience ongoing anxiety, sometimes for a matter of days, when such interactions are perceived as not having gone well [2], [3], [4]. They particularly struggle with recipients’ emotions and reactions to the news and assume personal responsibility for the emotional outcome [5], [6], [7]. Moreover, practitioners tend to interpret strong emotional reactions by recipients as an indicator of ineffectual communication or a failing on their part [1], [5], [8].
Researching recipients’ perspectives on bad news interactions are difficult [9], [10], [11], [12] and the established literature base has focused mainly on measurement of recipients’ satisfaction with clinicians’ technique, their comprehension of the information given, and the identification of which aspects of time, place and person the recipients liked or disliked [13], [14], [15], [16]. In effect, even when the recipients’ perspectives are sought, it is still the deliverer and the delivery processes that are examined, with only a few notable exceptions [17], [18], [19], [20].
While such research has facilitated significant improvements in the training and management of bad news communication [21], [22], [23] it might be also counterproductive, ignoring the potential individual influences arising from the wider psychosocial contexts of such interactions [24], [25], [26], and perpetuating clinicians’ own potentially damaging or self-critical responses to this aspect of their work.
Studies that have examined the recipients’ perspectives on receiving bad news have identified a broader time-frame in recipients’ understanding of the phenomenon, with receiving bad news viewed as an ongoing process in being seriously ill rather than a single isolated communication [17], [18], [19]. However, within those studies the moments of diagnostic confirmation and communications outlining new prognostic information have still been represented as key aspects of the experience [17], [18], [20] and bad news consultations continue to be viewed as pivotal moments in healthcare relationships [27], [28], [29].
The aim of this study was to gain a better understanding of the emotional experience of receiving bad news, and of recipients’ perspectives on the origins of their emotional reactions experienced during bad news consultations.
Section snippets
Methods
The Local Research Ethics Committee granted ethical approval for the project in September 2012, with agreement from the local NHS research and development office. All participants provided informed written consent. Pseudonyms are used in the reporting of the research to maintain participant anonymity.
Naming the experiences
Each family picked a range of descriptors from available pre-printed cards and chose to write a few of their own labels as well, selecting between five and 13 descriptors each. No single descriptor was chosen by all of the participants. The linguistic categorisation of the selected words is presented in Table 2.
The word ‘sick’, which was used as a descriptor by two different families, can be categorised as both a physical state and an affective state. While an affective state, related to
Discussion
This study explored recipients’ interpretations of their experiences of receiving bad news taking an open, non-directive approach in order to gain insights into recipients’ own beliefs about the origins of their feelings, rather than directing them to consider whether specific aspects, such as the clinician, clinic environment or language used, had played any role.
Of the 26 descriptors chosen in this study, only three were directly connected to the experience of the clinician and the management
Conflicts of interest
None.
Role of funding
This research was supported by The Edinburgh and Lothians’ Health Foundation Fund, with additional financial assistance provided by Children’s Cancer and Leukaemia Endowment Fund. The sponsors had no involvement in the study’s design, the collection, analysis or interpretation of the data, nor in the writing of the study report or decisions about publication.
Acknowledgement
The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of Dr Stephen Smith of the Leadership in Compassionate Care Programme, Edinburgh Napier University, for providing the Emotional Touch Points resources and training.
References (49)
- et al.
A Qualitative study of stress and coping in doctors breaking bad news
Patient Educ. Couns.
(2013) Improving communication with cancer patients
Eur. J. Cancer
(1999)Bad news from the patient’s perspective: an analysis of the written narratives of newly diagnosed cancer patients
Soc. Sci. Med.
(2002)- et al.
Are we there yet? The state of the evidence base for guidelines on breaking bad news to cancer patients
Eur. J. Cancer
(2009) - et al.
Breaking bad news: structured training for family medicine residents
Patient Educ. Couns.
(2002) - et al.
How patients perceive a doctor’s caring attitude
Patient Educ. Couns.
(2008) - et al.
Communicating bad sad, and difficult news in medicine
Lancet
(2004) - et al.
Caring about caring: developing a model to implement compassionate relationship centred care in an older people care setting
Int. J. Nurs. Stud.
(2013) - et al.
The referential structure of the effective lexicon
Cognit. Sci.
(1987) - et al.
Hearing the bad news of a cancer diagnosis: the Australian melanoma patient’s perspective
Ann. Oncol.
(2001)
Recipients’ perspective on breaking bad news: how you put it really makes a difference
Patient Educ. Couns.
Fellows’ forum: a workshop on the stress of being an oncologist
J. Cancer Educ.
Concerns about losing control when breaking bad news to terminally ill patients with cancer: physicians’ perspective
J. Palliat. Med.
I'm sorry to tell you … physicians’ reports of breaking bad news
J. Behav. Med.
Health professionals’ perceptions of breaking bad news
Int J. Health Care Qual. Assur.
Breaking bad news: experiences: views and difficulties of pre-registration house officers
Palliat. Med.
Can oncologists detect distress in their out-patients and how satisfied are they with their performance during bad news consultations?
Br. J. Cancer
The dynamics of ethical decision making in bereavement research
Research sensitivities to palliative care patients
Eur. J. Cancer Care
Conducting end-of-life studies in pediatric oncology
West. J. Nurs. Res.
Challenges to participation in paediatric palliative care research: a review of the literature
Palliat. Med.
Patients’ perceptions of receiving bad news about cancer
J. Clin. Oncol.
Preferences of cancer patients regarding communication of bad news: a systematic literature review
Jpn. J. Clin. Oncol.
Communicating prognosis in early breast cancer: do women understand the language used
Med. J. Aust.
Cited by (10)
The study of psychosocial outcomes of parents bereaved by pediatric illness: a scoping review of methodology and sample composition
2024, Journal of Pediatric Psychology‘And then there was silence’: shaping practice through the experience of parents’ emotions
2023, Journal of Research in NursingParental Perspectives on Life-Altering News in Emergency Settings: A Qualitative Evaluation
2023, Pediatric Emergency CareCurrent Research Trends and Research Themes of Breaking Bad News: A Systematic Review
2023, Education in Medicine Journal
- ☆
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in Scotland, with registration number SC005336.